ADVERTISEMENT

what do we do with the 3 over the scholarship situation

bleed husker red

All-American
Dec 1, 2002
4,620
5,539
113
Doesn't sound like any transfers. Do we have any non qualifiers in the class? Does someone like Fyfe who is now 4th string lose his scholly?

Any pending medical schollys? Or redshirt seniors that are a non factor not get a 5th year on their scholly?
 
Doesn't sound like any transfers. Do we have any non qualifiers in the class? Does someone like Fyfe who is now 4th string lose his scholly?

Any pending medical schollys? Or redshirt seniors that are a non factor not get a 5th year on their scholly?

Also, someone is bound to screw up and get booted before fall camp,. I dunno if Tolbert isn't already there, but there's bound to be someone. And I suspect someone will chose to move on once they start thinking about their place on the depth chart.
 
Also, someone is bound to screw up and get booted before fall camp,. I dunno if Tolbert isn't already there, but there's bound to be someone. And I suspect someone will chose to move on once they start thinking about their place on the depth chart.

Might happen sooner then you think.
 
thunderdome.jpg

Only viable solution
 
  • Like
Reactions: B.Ro
Wow what a shock to some of you ; young people from good families go to college and get wild - Whats the general population % ? Around 40% depending on definition. Lets be shocked if a couple mess up on the team?
 
Quick question for those that know, is the B1G doing the 4 year scholarship type thing in the near future? And we are also going to start paying stipends too?

So, what keeps a program from having a bunch of dead weight or non-contributors filling up the rosters?
 
Wow what a shock to some of you ; young people from good families go to college and get wild - Whats the general population % ? Around 40% depending on definition. Lets be shocked if a couple mess up on the team?

Pretty sure he was being sarcastic
 
Quick question for those that know, is the B1G doing the 4 year scholarship type thing in the near future? And we are also going to start paying stipends too?

So, what keeps a program from having a bunch of dead weight or non-contributors filling up the rosters?

Better talent evaluation when recruiting. Or not allocating all 85 scholarships -- keep a reserve for the walk-ons so you can cut local kids loose from year to year as needed.
 
Riley has used the greyshirt system a lot in the past and I would assume this is the fallback position.
 
A student blogger (who's dad was a Husker) that is dating Josh Faulkenberry wrote some of her thoughts about the NU program.

Here's the link.

I don't know if the staff is aggressively reducing scholarship players.
 
A student blogger (who's dad was a Husker) that is dating Josh Faulkenberry wrote some of her thoughts about the NU program.

Here's the link.

I don't know if the staff is aggressively reducing scholarship players.

So somebody's very upset that we didn't keep Faulkenberry as the long snapper and give him a scholarship, but she's drawing some HUGE conclusions from that.

"But at least Bo and every other former Husker coach gave walk-on's a shot at their dreams." So because Bruce Read and Mike Riley wanted an upgrade at LS, Riley doesn't believe in walk-ons?

Faulkenberry was at best adequate last year. Pelini was forced to bring in another LS to handle the truly long snaps, and the long snaps in the spring game only confirmed for me that we needed another option besides Faulkenberry.

I appreciate what he did for us. His short snaps were good enough, though well shy of Gabe Miller in both speed and precision.

To conclude from Faulkenberry not getting a scholarship that Riley is just generally anti- walk-on is presumptuous at best.
 
Yeah that blogger doesn't know what they are talking about.

Riley grew up in the Bear Bryant school of coaching - a coach who treated walkons similar to Nebraska's tradition towards them.

Under Riley, Oregon State had one of the better walkon progams in the country including having OSU walkons win the Bilitnikoff and Groza trophies.

It's also ironic given the source considering some of OSU's most notable walkon successes were walkon specialists who ended their college career on scholarship.
 
Yeah that blogger doesn't know what they are talking about.

Riley grew up in the Bear Bryant school of coaching - a coach who treated walkons similar to Nebraska's tradition towards them.

Under Riley, Oregon State had one of the better walkon progams in the country including having OSU walkons win the Bilitnikoff and Groza trophies.

It's also ironic given the source considering some of OSU's most notable walkon successes were walkon specialists who ended their college career on scholarship.
Huh? She never said they shouldn't bring someone else in on scholarship. And although she mentioned that she wished Faulkenberry had received the scholarship, her beef was that he was told to leave after starting all those games last year and not be part of the competition going forward. I always think competition is a good thing (as well as having a backup who can get the job done). I'm not sure what the purpose is in cutting bait with him.
 
Actually, my point for linking the blog was not to start a debate concerning walk-ons, nor Faulkenberry.

According to the blogger (Faulkenberry's girlfriend), Bruce Read called Faulkenberry into his office after the spring game. Bruce Read gave Faulkenberry 3 options:

1. Transfer
2. Quit the football team
3. Stay on the team as a passive observer

If the coaching staff is aggressively handling walk-ons, I would guess the coaching staff is aggressively handling scholarship players not meeting expectations. Thus, 3 over scholarships, or any number of over scholarships for that matter, would be handled aggressively and likely would not be a problem to get within scholarship limits. But, it is a guess concerning scholarship players, as I haven't heard about any of those discussions.
 
My opinion on the blog post is life is some times unfair, however I do believe that the current coaches are exceptional at talent evaluation. They watched a lot of film from last year and there is a reason they made the decision that they did regarding long snapper and/or other positions. If anything, it says to me that they are working to make this team better, and that is a good thing. Coach has stated multiple times he is acutely aware of the expectations here. If things don't go well, we all know what is going to happen. You can't always have it both ways, you either improve the quality of football on the team across the board, or you don't. I'm fine with what they have done. Our special teams have been horrible the last few years and it is something that needed to be addressed.

I certainly don't want to see players taken advantage of, but I also don't want a roster of non contributors that aren't of the highest level of D1 football talent either. It's a privilege to play here, not some inherent right given to you because you grew up down the road or across town.
 
A student blogger (who's dad was a Husker) that is dating Josh Faulkenberry wrote some of her thoughts about the NU program.

Here's the link.

I don't know if the staff is aggressively reducing scholarship players.

Huh? She never said they shouldn't bring someone else in on scholarship. And although she mentioned that she wished Faulkenberry had received the scholarship, her beef was that he was told to leave after starting all those games last year and not be part of the competition going forward. I always think competition is a good thing (as well as having a backup who can get the job done). I'm not sure what the purpose is in cutting bait with him.



He's a bad walk on long snapper. The program isn't losing its traditions because they're basically cutting a bad long snapper.

And if this chick really knew about the walk on history, she would know Nebraska used to bring in 50 walk ons per season and 25 guys would be cut each year.
 
I don't think it is going to be an issue. Players are taking care of that themselves. Plus with a couple who are rumored to be going it is going to be a non-issue and that isn't even taking into account any underclassman transfers that might happen.
 
Except for getting a miracle freshman returner; we had basically fallen to worst in the nation on special teams. Coach Riley may not have gone with a separate coach again; but probably saw at a mess so big; its big opportunities to change and improve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sparky62
He's a bad walk on long snapper. The program isn't losing its traditions because they're basically cutting a bad long snapper.

And if this chick really knew about the walk on history, she would know Nebraska used to bring in 50 walk ons per season and 25 guys would be cut each year.
What I was thinking.

She repeatedly said he made little to no mistakes. Maybe in regards to accuracy. But correct me if Im wrong but I recall his velocity to be severely lacking. And I dont know a lot about long snappers but Im pretty sure velocity is what truly separates a good long snapper from an ok to bad long snapper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sparky62
Except for getting a miracle freshman returner; we had basically fallen to worst in the nation on special teams. Coach Riley may not have gone with a separate coach again; but probably saw at a mess so big; its big opportunities to change and improve.

We weren't good on special teams, but not quite worst in the nation. There were 125 teams last year, with a little over half of those in the "Power 5" conferences.

5th in punt returns (thanks Demornay)
70th in net punting (Foltz was 47th in distance)
63d in kickoff returns
65th in kickoff return defense
90th in punt return defense
Brown was 83d in FG accuracy

We were 1st in the nation in blocked kicks with 6 blocks and only one blocked.

Don't know how it all would fall out, but there's a good chance that other than punt returns we were in the bottom 5 or so special teams among Power 5 conference teams.

LOTS of room for improvement. We could pick up a win just by becoming slightly above average in special teams.
 
He's a bad walk on long snapper. The program isn't losing its traditions because they're basically cutting a bad long snapper.

And if this chick really knew about the walk on history, she would know Nebraska used to bring in 50 walk ons per season and 25 guys would be cut each year.
He's so bad that he started all games last year and snapped for both teams during the spring game? I'm not saying he is the guy who should be starting but pinning all your hopes on brand new player who has never stepped on the field seems a bit crazy.
What I was thinking.

She repeatedly said he made little to no mistakes. Maybe in regards to accuracy. But correct me if Im wrong but I recall his velocity to be severely lacking. And I dont know a lot about long snappers but Im pretty sure velocity is what truly separates a good long snapper from an ok to bad long snapper.
You miss the point. Why would you cut a WALK-ON longsnapper who started every game? Why not keep him for competition or at least a backup role?
 
At least one reason. Faulkenberry was at one point on academic scholarship. As I understand it, the general rule is that a football player who is actually playing in games cannot take academic scholarship money. If he wanted/needed some kind of scholarship in order to keep going to college then it's either give him a football scholarship or tell him he won't be playing on Saturdays.

We also have another walk-on LS coming in. If Read is sure Faulkenberry drops immediately to #3 then we really don't have any need for 3 long snappers on the team.
 
At least one reason. Faulkenberry was at one point on academic scholarship. As I understand it, the general rule is that a football player who is actually playing in games cannot take academic scholarship money. If he wanted/needed some kind of scholarship in order to keep going to college then it's either give him a football scholarship or tell him he won't be playing on Saturdays.

We also have another walk-on LS coming in. If Read is sure Faulkenberry drops immediately to #3 then we really don't have any need for 3 long snappers on the team.
OK...if the academic scholarship is in question then I can possibly see it. Otherwise it doesn't make any sense unless he is some kind of bad apple.
 
It could also be as simple as they have a number for the entire roster to keep in mind. One departure opens the door for another walk-on to make the team. If he's not likely part of the picture, the earlier he moves on the better for him.
 
Thank you Reunite; and for your work with the stats. By mentioning DPE, I meant to acknowledge our improvement last year - the year before was much worse. The impression I had, was that Bo dived in and made sure we did much better last year ( and good job Bo, but a shame it took him ).
I don't feel we have a divine right to win at a high level; the N way is to innovate and compete; giving the deepest effort. Some frustrated here are making great points. If you are a coach at N, well paid, why wouldn't you be aiming to make the top ten in every category.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT